Observers’ attributions of culpability in sexual assault cases have been studied in the context of psycholegal variables to explain how they come to their conclusions. Most research has revealed that there are differences between stranger and acquaintance rape, where victims of the latter are more likely to be blamed (Allgeier & Allgeier, 1995; Bridges & McGrail, 1989; Littleton, 2001; Mynatt & Allgeier, 1990; Scronce & Corcoran, 1995; Schuller & Klippenstine, 2004; Tetreault & Barnett, 1987). However, the work has been largely limited to examining rape myth acceptance and gender differences of observers. The present study addressed these limitations. The goals of this study were: (1) to examine judgments of perpetrator responsibility, (2) to examine the relationship between benevolent sexism and victim blame in an acquaintance rape, (3) to examine as to how benevolent sexism influences assailant blame, and (4) to examine differences between males and females on a sexism measure in relation to attribution of blame. This research utilized a community sample. Several groups of measures were utilized, including sexual assault vignettes with a questionnaire that assessed perceptions of sexual assault. Also administered were measures that assessed for social desirability, benevolent sexism, the preference for unequal relationships, and demographics. Two studies were conducted. The first one was a pilot study, which gathered qualitative and descriptive data for a measure designed specifically for this research. Participants (n= 20) reported that the measure was simple to read, understand and complete. The second study (200 participants) focused on the goals outlined and obtained reliability and principal components analysis information. Findings from study 2 revealed no significant differences between men and women in attribution of responsibility. However, assailant-victim relationship, and the presence of alcohol were statistically significant for blame. Although men scored higher on benevolent sexism in general, women obtained high scores when assailant-victim relationship and the presence of alcohol in the scenarios were taken into account. Similar to previous research (Abrams, Viki, Masser, & Bohner, 2003; Viki & Abrams, 2002; Viki, Masser, & Abrams, 2004), benevolent sexism was found to act as a moderator. Implications from results from this study were also discussed.

Observers’ attributions of culpability in sexual assault cases have been studied in the context of psycholegal variables to explain how they come to their conclusions. Most research has revealed that there are differences between stranger and acquaintance rape, where victims of the latter are more likely to be blamed (Allgeier & Allgeier, 1995; Bridges & McGrail, 1989; Littleton, 2001; Mynatt & Allgeier, 1990; Scronce & Corcoran, 1995; Schuller & Klippenstine, 2004; Tetreault & Barnett, 1987). However, the work has been largely limited to examining rape myth acceptance and gender differences of observers. The present study addressed these limitations. The goals of this study were: (1) to examine judgments of perpetrator responsibility, (2) to examine the relationship between benevolent sexism and victim blame in an acquaintance rape, (3) to examine as to how benevolent sexism influences assailant blame, and (4) to examine differences between males and females on a sexism measure in relation to attribution of blame. This research utilized a community sample. Several groups of measures were utilized, including sexual assault vignettes with a questionnaire that assessed perceptions of sexual assault. Also administered were measures that assessed for social desirability, benevolent sexism, the preference for unequal relationships, and demographics. Two studies were conducted. The first one was a pilot study, which gathered qualitative and descriptive data for a measure designed specifically for this research. Participants (n= 20) reported that the measure was simple to read, understand and complete. The second study (200 participants) focused on the goals outlined and obtained reliability and principal components analysis information. Findings from study 2 revealed no significant differences between men and women in attribution of responsibility. However, assailant-victim relationship, and the presence of alcohol were statistically significant for blame. Although men scored higher on benevolent sexism in general, women obtained high scores when assailant-victim relationship and the presence of alcohol in the scenarios were taken into account. Similar to previous research (Abrams, Viki, Masser, & Bohner, 2003; Viki & Abrams, 2002; Viki, Masser, & Abrams, 2004), benevolent sexism was found to act as a moderator. Implications from results from this study were also discussed.

The present research examined the influence of military status, organizational climate type, gender, and attitudes toward sexual harassment on juror decisions in a sexual harassment trial. Military participants rated themselves as having more stereotypical masculine characteristics and they rated sexual harassment allegations more seriously. The permissive climate type elicited less serious allegation ratings. Females rated all climates as more permissive, found the defendant more liable, and chose more severe punishments. Tolerant attitudes toward sexual harassment predicted juror decisions for both ROTC and civilian mock jurors. The results highlight the need for further education about sexual harassment to reduce tolerant attitudes and permissive organizational climates, and to increase fairness in harassment trials.

Past research has investigated the cross-race effect in the context of eyewitnesses and jury decision-making. The main goal of my thesis was to gain further insight into participants’ knowledge of the cross-race effect and how this impacted participants’ discrimination of same- and cross-race identifications. One hundred fifty-nine undergraduate students from UOIT viewed a series of showup identification videos. I found that participants were better able to discriminate accurate from inaccurate same-race identifications than cross-race identifications. However, participants believed White witnesses more and found them more credible than South Asian witnesses. Further research should investigate other conditions that influence people’s abilities to discriminate accurate from inaccurate eyewitness identifications. / UOIT

The jury method is a unique social setting in the Criminal Justice system that provides opportunity for social influence to occur. Questions about the formation of jurors’ individual and collective decisions have stimulated a great deal of interest and research. This study is a review of the juror decision-making process and the various sources of influence that can affect it. Mock jurors were asked to review a mock criminal trial as well as the testimony of 2 witnesses. Upon reviewing the case, a predeliberation verdict (guilty or not guilty) and the degree of certainty of that decision was made. Once deliberation had occurred and ended, the jurors were asked to make a postdeliberation verdict. This study was conducted to see if conformity would take place during a mock jury deliberation, and how influential the actual deliberation was on the jurors. The results demonstrated that not only did jury deliberation influence individual juror’s verdicts, but it made their verdict confidence stronger as well.

Mass shootings, whether on a smaller scale or a large scale, take place frequently (LaFraniere, Cohen, & Oppel, 2015). Yet the media only covers a small fraction of crime events, and those selected often gather large amounts of attention. This is problematic because by only focusing on the only most extreme and newsworthy cases, the media distorts the general public's understanding of crime in the United States, and a person's actual likelihood of victimization (Schildkraut & Elsass, 2016). The purpose of the proposed study is to investigate in a nationally represented sample how individuals’ causal attributions for a school shooting with an Asian shooter, as well as whether media influence moderate their attitudes toward the shooter. Participants will be subjected to one of two media conditions, editorial type news or straight news, regarding a shooting and then will answer casual attribution questions and perceptions of the shooter. Participants who judge in-group members as the shooter are predicted to more likely to attribute the crime to external than individuals who judge out-group members. Also, it is predicted that individuals who judge out-group members as a shooter will not be more likely to attribute the crime to internal factors than individuals who judge in-group members. Lastly, it is predicted that editorial type news will influence individuals to attribute the shooting more to both external and internal factors than straight news would. This study may add important information on how media should be portrayed, and further explore attributions that are made against shooters. Implications for future research are also discussed.

Disparities in the administration of capital punishment are a prominent social and political issue. While the focus of death penalty disparity research initially lay with the defendant and how the defendant’s race or ethnicity affects sentencing outcomes, only marginal support for offender effects has been found. A consistent finding, however, is that victim race has a significant effect on capital sentencing outcomes. Recent examinations of the joint effects of victim characteristics indicate that victim gender also has some influence in capital sentencing decisions. While these prior studies have examined the interactive effects of victim gender and victim race the current study proposes that victim-related variables other than race may be important components in understanding the female victim effect. This analysis is focused on understanding the joint effects of victim gender in terms of identifying an “innocent female victim” effect. Based on prior studies and theoretical perspectives, three hypotheses are proposed and tested here using a sub-population of capital cases in North Carolina between the years 1990 and 2007: 1. Cases with a female victim and male defendant will be more likely to result in the death penalty than other defendant-victim gender dyads, 2. Cases with a female victim and stranger defendant will be more likely to result in the death penalty than other dyads, and 3. Cases with a female victim who was not involved in illegal activity at the time of her victimization will be more likely to result in the death penalty than other dyads. The results indicate that victim conduct (illegal activity) and victim gender both play a role in jury sentencing recommendations, but regardless of victim conduct, cases with a female victim are the most likely to result in the death penalty. Therefore, this study finds marginal support for an “innocent female victim” effect in jury decisions to recommend the death penalty, but consistent support for a “female victim” effect. Conclusions and implications of the findings are discussed.

How can empirical science, and psychology in particular, be harnessed to avoid or eliminate unwanted biases? The body of work herein explores this question across twelve experiments. The first approach we consider is placing the onus on the individual to root out any already existing bias within him or herself. Chapter 3, for example, presents experiments that assess whether people (viz., jurors during voir dire) can accurately "self-diagnose" when they are irreparably biased by negative pretrial publicity. (The answer is a resounding no). A second approach is to try and avoid letting bias enter the courtroom in the first place. Chapter 4, for example, provides an experimental test of an institutional solution known as blind expertise, wherein certain biases of an expert witness are avoided by having an intermediary pick the expert, and then having the expert render an opinion before knowing which litigant made the request. In Chapter 7, we consider a third approach to handling bias, one that concedes it will exist in the courtroom. Namely, instruct jurors on the existence of bias, so that they can try to weigh it properly. To this end we test a recently enacted New Jersey instruction on eyewitness testimony. We find that jurors do not become more sensitive to low versus high evidence quality, but instead they discount the eyewitness testimony across the board. Across this inquiry, we deploy several novel tactics; in Chapter 5, for instance, we explore how continuous response measurement (CRM) can provide unique insights into the study of reasoning, and in particular how jurors parse trial evidence. We end in chapter 8 with a more general discussion of how behavioral science can be applied across law and policy.

My thesis critically examines the role that the U.S. Supreme Court's "death is different" jurisprudence has played in the development of life without parole (LWOP) sentencing.

abstract: In recent years, the use of biologically based (neurological, neuropsychological, genetic) evidence in criminal trials as support for claims of mental impairments among offenders has increased in popularity. However, research on how exposure to those arguments affects jury decision-making remains unclear. Specifically, arguments rooted in biology sometimes mitigate and sometimes aggravate judgments of criminal responsibility for mentally ill offenders, and this discrepancy seems to stem from the specific conditions by which that disorder was acquired. The following study’s aim was to uncover the precise mechanism(s) behind this elusive effect. Utilizing a 2x2 between subjects experimental design, participants were presented with a hypothetical crime summary involving an offender with either an onset controllable or uncontrollable mental disorder. Ratings of criminal responsibility and other variables hypothesized to function as mediators were obtained after presentation of a prime supporting either a biologically deterministic or free will argument for human behavior in general. Results indicated that when the defendant’s disorder was the result of the his own actions (onset controllable), a biological prime decreased judgments of criminal responsibility; however, when the disorder was caused by factors out of his control (onset uncontrollable), the prime increased judgments of criminal responsibility. An examination of several possible mechanisms finds the effect mediated by the perception of control the defendant could have had over his own actions at the time of the crime. These results suggest that perceptions of behavioral control are an important contributor to jurors’ formation of criminal responsibility judgments when an offender possesses a mental illness; and arguments advocating a biological basis for human behavior reliably affect blame attribution, suggesting that a societal shift in the perception of free will as a result of increased exposure to biology in general may alter the framework of criminal responsibility judgments. / Dissertation/Thesis / Masters Thesis Psychology 2017